High Density Three Dimensional Multi-Layer Farming

ABSTRACT

In order to achieve food and energy security, while at the same time eliminating the “food vs. biofuel” conflict, a transformational three dimensional multilayer farming, MLF, is presented. This exploits the third dimension. This goal is realizable by the disclosed means and methods to increase the 3D plant productivity, 3D yield, ton/m3/year, using ultra-compact ultra high density vertical structures. Each layer in the MLF system comprises at least one string of SanSSoil Growth Elements, SGEs, each designed to carry out multiple functions essential to sustain plant growth, and constructed in a manner to integrate these functions at low-cost. The networked strings of SGEs in each layer provide near self-sufficiency for growth, and in an integrated MLF system, achieve maximum vertical compactness and highest growth density. The multi-functions of each integrally made SGE include: germination, growth sustenance, localized delivery of nutrients, environment sensing, and localized delivery of illumination.

RELATED APPLICATIONS

Not applicable.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

1. Field of the Invention

This invention is related to the field of agriculture, horticulture,agronomy and agro-economics of food, energy, and other organism madesubstances. It is specifically related optimizing plant, yields,photosynthetic energy conversion efficiency as well as the utilizationefficiencies of other resources, including, time, space, water, andnutrients. Even more specifically, the invention is related to indoor,environmental controlled farming in three dimensional, 3D, spaces,vertical farming, without the reliance on the sun energy or soil. It isalso related to 3D farming systems comprising a plurality of layers eachof which is capable of sustaining the growth of plants.

2. Description of Related Art

My Co-pending Application entitled “SanSSoil (Soil-less) Indoor Farmingfor Food and Energy Production” is incorporated herein by reference inits entirety. This Application hereafter is referred to as “the FirstSanSSoil Application” or “FSA,” introduced more detailed backgroundinformation expounding the limitations and liabilities of conventionalsoil-based agriculture. It presented inventive teachings of alternativesoil-less indoor three dimensional multi-layer farming that are based ofthe Agriculture Profitability Assurance Law, AgriPAL, and the novelPlant Growth Model, PGM.

Together, AgriPAL and PGM present for the first time, mathematicalanalytical foundation, based on scientific principles, that describe howphotosynthesis works, and presents formulas for predicting yield, energyefficiency, and agronomic profitability. They unraveled mysteries thatto date eluded and baffled plant scientists and agronomists. Theyrevealed the notion of solar gain, and astonishingly high physiologicalgains which can be garnered by means of better underrating of resourceutilization efficiencies. These gains increase the yields andefficiencies by more than 10 fold and a path to approach and exceed 100fold.

The FSA has inspired more transformational inventive contributions thatare described in the present Application and subsequent relatedapplications. The background, the formulas and the scientific teachingsin FSA, is therefore relied upon heavily in the present application.

Will we Produce Enough Food to Adequately Feed the World?

Advances in health sciences and technologies, in combination with betternutrition, are paving the path to nearly eradicate infant mortalitywhile increasing life spans to beyond the present average of 80 years.Consequently, it is expected that the world population will swell to atleast 9 billion by 2050. It has been recognized that such a level ofprojected population increase will pose a formidable challenges to ourplanet, stressing its already limited resources: food, energy, land, andwater, and fomenting acrimonious competition and conflicts, to obtainand sustain good quality of life and lifestyle.

These challenges have recently been highlighted by the United Nations'Food and Agriculture Organization, FAO, which published the findings ofa High Level Experts Forum, in Rome, Oct. 12-13, 2009, entitled “How toFeed the World 2050”. Also in the Jun. 15, 2011 Issue, CO2-Science,published by the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and GlobalChange, Dr. C. D. Idso, highlighted the challenges in his articleentitled “Estimates of Global Food Production in the Year 2050: Will WeProduce Enough to Adequately Feed the World?”

Both the FAO and Idso reports reveal an alarming consensus: that asignificant per capita reduction is looming, in global food production,arable land, water resources, and farm yields of staple food crops. Toavoid the disastrous consequences, they point to the need for a radicalparadigm shift in food production technologies, systems and methods. Thepresent food supply-demand gap continues to have devastatingconsequences in many parts of the world, in the forms of hunger,mal-nutrition, and deaths. According to FAO, there are 1 billion hungrypeople in 2012. The projected widening of that gap will worsen by 2050for a 9 billion population. In addition to famine in many parts of theworld, geopolitical strife will also cause incalculable adverse effectson the welfare of humanity.

These challenges are further magnified by the following three conflicts:

Conflict #1: Food vs. Less CO2

There are many who are concerned over global warming caused by carbondioxide emissions. They have embraced the cause of curbing fossil fueluse and are advocating CO2 reduction measures, and urging governments.They have influenced certain governments to act, and laws have beenenacted attempting to discourage the use of resources that increaseglobal CO2. However, this position is in direct conflict with the needto sustain life and to feed the world, as a first priority. At present,1 billion hungry people need urgent attention, growing to be 3-4 billionin 2050. It is puzzling contradiction that the “global warming”community relies of questionable photosynthesis models to predict direconsequences for humanity in 2100, yet they cannot use the same modelsto understand why plant food efficiency is <0.5% (Table 1). The full andaccurate understanding may very well prove that more CO2 is better atabsorbing heat and at the same time deals with today's urgent need forfood and biofuel. After all, CO2 is the main ingredient for food andlife itself (living mass is hydrocarbon matter).

Conflict #2: Food vs. Fuel

Direct consequences of the global warming mitigation are the mandatesimposed by the US and EU and other countries to produce CO2 neutraltransportation fuel from biomass, biofuel. This presents yet a secondconflict with the priority of feeding the world. It is feared by manythat biofuel exacerbates the problem by diverting already scarceresources normally dedicated to food production: arable land, water,seeds, fertilizers, herbicides, farming tools. The food and energy pricepressures that ensue will make it even harder for many vulnerablesegment of the global population to close the nutrition gap. It isfeared that their numbers will increase. It is also in conflict withachieving both food and energy security. This food vs. fuel debatecontinues unabated: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_vs._fuel

Conflict #3: Food vs. Forest Land

As shown in Table 1,(http://arpa-e.energy.gov/Portals/O/Docwnents/ConferencesAndEvents/PastWorkshops/ABTF%20Workshop%20-%20Ort%20Presentation.pdf)plant scientists, and agronomists agree that the measured efficiency is˜0.5%, however, they cannot fully account for all the ˜99.5% losses,i.e., the where these losses originate. The full accounting for theselosses is the key to inventing ways to minimize them.

Plants store solar energy in the form molecular bond energies ofcarbohydrates, sugars, starches, cellulose and proteins. The economicsof conventional farming, to profitably produce generally affordablestaple foods (sugars, cereal grains, legumes, leafy vegetable, andtubers such as: potato, yams, cassava), relies directly on the zero costof solar energy, ZCOE. This forces cultivation outdoors, on twodimensional lands, because the solar radiation is delivered in units ofWatt per unit area (hectares, acres, or square meters).

The reliance on this ZCOE has therefore, forced conventional agronomy tosuccumb to accepting ˜0.1 to 0.5% efficiencies (see Table 1). One of themain factors leading to such low efficiency is the need to use the soilto support plant growth, and soil borne nutrients which are not easilycontrolled. This lack of control makes soil a liability rather than anasset. The main concern breeder's have, when producing a new variety, isthe specific environment (geography) and the soil mineral composition.This means instead of having one optimum seed that fits all, they willneed produce an astonishingly large number of cultivar oaf particularspecies to serve as wide a market as possible. Even, then productioncost constraints will require compromise. This is a consequence ofuncontrolled outdoor soil based agriculture.

Therefore, because of the reliance on ZCOE, the growers, and the foodproduction enterprises, have limited or no control. This in turn haslead to the requirement of enormous resources that are inefficientlyused, including: insatiable demand for two dimensional arable land,water, fertilizers, and pesticides. To accommodate the populationincrease from 1 billion in 1800 to the present, ˜7 billion, requireddeforestation at a high rate. On a global scale, once again fearing thatdeforestation adversely impacts the issue of global warming, governmentsare enacting laws and mandates to restrict increasing farm land bydeforestation. This is the third conflict with the priority to feed theworld, and achieving energy security.

TABLE 1 Efficiencies of selected crops Annual solar energy conversionefficiencies of C3 and C4 agricultural crops. Yield Efficiency Crop Typet ha⁻¹y⁻¹ (%) Elephant grass Pennistum purpureum C4 88 0.8 Sugar canesaccharum officinarum C4 66 0.6 corn zea mays C4 27 0.4 beet betavulgaris C3 32 0.5 rye lolium perenne C3 23 1.7 potato solanum tuberosumC3 11 0.3 Wheat triticum aestivum C3 12 0.2

Farming Profitability and Economic Viability, AgriPAL

In my co-pending FSA, the formulation of Agriculture ProfitabilityAssurance Law, AgriPAL, was presented and discussed extensively. It isrepeated here as EQ. (2)

$\begin{matrix}{{{\eta_{E}( \frac{ɛ_{sol}}{ɛ_{other}} )}\frac{\overset{\_}{ROE}}{\overset{\_}{COE}}} \geq {( {1 + p + f + v} ).}} & (2)\end{matrix}$

AgriPAL enables an enterprise to predict profitability of plant growingsystems, to prices, and to identify efficiency bottlenecks.

The economic viability index, EVI, is defined as:

${{EVI} \equiv {\eta_{E}( \frac{ɛ_{sol}}{ɛ_{other}} )}} = {\eta_{E}{g_{solar}.}}$

This links for the first time the economic parameters of farming,profit, p, fixed cost, f, variable cost, v, to the physiologicalparameters of organisms (plants, algae, other phototrophs), energyconversion efficiency, η_(E), including a gain factor,

${g_{solar} = ( \frac{ɛ_{sol}}{ɛ_{other}} )},$

wherein, ε_(sol), is the solar energy consumed per cycle and, ε_(other),all other energies consumed.

An enhanced EVI, was derived from a the new Plant Growth Model, PGM,also described in FSA, is given by: EVI^(e)≡η_(E) ^(e)≡g_(e)η_(E). Thisincreases the efficiency by yet another gain factor, g_(e), which can be10-100, achieved by means of controlling and optimizing physiologicalgrowth parameters as well maximizing the temporal and spatial resourceutilization efficiencies.

The present invention comprises aspects of AgriPAL that deals withmaximizing space utilization efficiencies, which include threedimensional, 3D, soil-less, SanSSoil, plant growing structures andsubsystems to sustain growth. More specifically, the aspects that reducethe cost of said structures and subsystems which lead to theminimization of the parameter f in Eq. (2). Even more specifically, theincrease of g_(e)η_(E) which is a function of the n, the number ofvertical layers in 3D farming systems wherein the yield is measured inunits of ton/hectare-meter, or ton/m3, or kg/m3.

Prior Art Agriculture Methods

As is well known, since its invention, agriculture is generallypracticed in the form depicted in FIG. 1A, comprising the essentialelements of food production: i)—the sun; ii)—2D field, an area coveredwith soil that mechanically and physiologically support plant growth;and iii)—water irrigation source, and nutrients. This is referred to asarable land that combines adequate quantities of sun, water, andnutrients which generally come at no cost. The supplemental nutrients orfertilizers, when added, carry a relatively low cost. As demonstrated byAgriPAL described in FSA, this form of farming has been profitablebecause the main ingredients come at little or no cost.

In recent years, the adoption of indoor controlled environmentagriculture, CEA has increased. An exemplary prior art reference is U.S.Pat. No. 3,931,695 which gives a good description of CEA. In CEA, thegrowth area is sheltered, making the control of many plant growthparameters possible, thereby achieving higher yields and higher resourceutilization efficiencies. The increased use of soil-less hydroponic oraeroponics nutrient delivery practices increased the economic viabilityfor growing many plants. FIG. 1B illustrates the elements of CEA, alsoreferred to as greenhouse. When solar illumination is used, CEA is thesame as conventional sheltered farming with the added benefit ofprotection from the weather and better control of pesticides, nutrients,and water. When temperature control is added, yields can be enhanced andmany planting cycles become possible year round. When artificiallighting is used, extending growth periods to 24 hours per day becomespossible.

Applying AgriPAL has shown that this growing method of farming, whilegrowing in acceptance, is economically viable for certain high valueadded plants. It is not possible to economically (profitably) producestaple crop or biofuel using indoor farming because of the added dailyenergy consumption for heating or cooling, and the cost of the addedinfrastructure. The objects of FSA and present invention are inventiveaspects that make indoor farming viable even for staple foods.

Most recently, Van Gemeret et al. taught 3D farming system in USPublication 2011/0252705, Oct. 20, 2011 which is depicted in FIG. 1C.The system resembles stacking many edifice floors vertically, resemblingthe greenhouses in FIG. 1B but placed one on top of the other. The mostprominent features of this vertical farming concept are: i)—higherproductivity per unit area; ii)—the plants in each floor are independentof the plants of neighboring floors; iii)—the floors do not shareresources (light nutrients) directly; iv)—constrained to use onlyartificial lighting; and v)—the ceiling height, h, of each floor makesthe system highly inefficient in terms of productivity per unit height.The economic viability is possible only for high value added productslike tulips, cut flower, etc. As will be shown in more details, thepresent invention addresses these limitations, by means of making growthlayers in the from of networked strings that are coupled to each othersharing light, and nutrients, thereby compressing the vertical heightneeded for growth by factors ranging from 5 to 50.

There are numerous other proposals for 3D vertical farming, but noneaddressed the issues of cost reduction, understanding photosynthesisenergy efficiency, vertical space utilization efficiency, and otherresource efficiencies in order to make staple food and biofuelproduction economically feasible. More specifically, they do not meetthe AgriPAL profitability condition, Eq. (2) except for very high pricedproducts, i.e., for

$\frac{\overset{\_}{ROE}}{\overset{\_}{COE}} > 100.$

FIGS. 1D-1H illustrate prior art plant growing methods having distinctenvironments, (elements) 50 a-50 e, each of which comprises, a plant 53illuminated by the sun 51. They are distinguished by the type of growingmedium, the plant to mechanical support, and the method of deliveringnutrients to the plants. In the case of elements 50 a, 50 b and 50 e,the soil provides the support and nutrients are delivered directly tothe soil which are them up taken by plant roots.

In the case of element 50 c, the hydroponic method well known in the artis used comprising, a mechanical structure 54, (container) for growingone or more plants. The container is filled intermittently (orcontinuously) with nutrients 55, and the plant up takes the nutrientthrough a porous root support structure, 52 a. This root supportstructure replaces soil.

The aeroponics method, 50 d, also known in the art, comprises a plantsupport structure 56, through which the roots penetrate to bottom space57 c, where the roots are sprayed directly by means of nozzle 57. Thismethod is known to achieve better yields than the soil based and thehydroponic systems because the roots are in direct contact with theambient oxygen. Its main disadvantage is the low vertical spaceutilization efficiency and the spray nozzle clogging.

In all the cases, the roots are feed by a plurality of differentphysically separated components (discrete instead of integralcomponents). Also all of these elements feed the roots indirectly fromthe bottom.

Another key aspects of the present invention is an integrally formedgrowing element called SanSSoil Growing Element, SGE. It isself-sufficient in the sense that it integrates many essential functionsfor growth in the smallest space and a lowest cost. One distinguishingfeature is the direct delivery of nutrients to the plant root from topdown, instead of spaying the root from the bottom up. The integralmultifunction constructs of the SGE's enable their connection intostrings and 3D network of strings that will save space and resources bysharing resources. The inventive aspects of the SGE are key reason forcost reduction to enable staple economical food farming satisfyingAgriPAL condition even when

$ \frac{\overset{\_}{ROE}}{\overset{\_}{COE}} \sim 1.$

The construction and functions of the SGE and their interconnection intonetworks of strings are the main object of the present invention.

Liabilities of Soil Based Outdoor Agriculture

In the above, we discussed the high cost of the involuntary dependenceon solar energy; enticed by the zero cost to ensure economic viabilityoutdoor farming. One of the consequences is forcing conventionalagronomy to succumb to accepting ˜0.5% and as low as 0.1% efficiency.This afforded little or no control over the energy efficiency, η_(E), tomake further improvements beyond what has already been achieved in thelast 50 years, ˜20 times yield improvements, the fruits of the GreenRevolution that started in 1950s.

Going forward, perhaps only fractional gains may be realized, which areoffset by higher per capita demand. The low efficiency and lack ofcontrol of outdoor solar-based and soil-based farming have lead to therequirement of enormous resources that are used inefficiently including:insatiable demand for two dimensional arable land, water, fertilizers,and pesticides.

In Section II of my Co-pending FSA, I presented a number of exampleshighlighting the challenges associated with growing staple commodityfoods indoors, and why that is not possible if one relied of the limitedprior art understanding of the efficiency, η_(E), concluding thatoutdoor field soil-based farming is the only presently available viableoption for growing staple food to feed the world, and growing biofuel,energy for transportation.

This viable outdoor option is for the continuous reliance on the zerocost solar energy, and its associated drawbacks or requiring vastresources that are not utilized efficiently. In addition, the outdoorfarming constraint, subjects the growers to other consequences;environmental and economic risks, unexpected crop losses due tomicroscopic pathogens, weeds, droughts, floods, and extreme unseasonabletemperature variations.

OBJECTS OF THE INVENTION

In order to solve the formidable food and energy problems and challengesfacing humanity and eliminating the contradictory conflicts, atransformational departure from conventional agricultures is needed.Conventional agricultures is constrained to be in the outdoor open fieldenvironment. This constraint is a consequence of the reliance on zerocost of solar energy, CO2, and water for photosynthetic to producebiomass for food and energy. The path to the solutions of theaforementioned problems is abandoning outdoor soil-based agriculturethat requires enormous supplies of arable lands and water resources.Following this new path provides great benefits which include:eliminating the lack of control over nutrients, 1000 times water saving,eliminating adverse environmental conditions, and soil-borne pathogens.

Instead of conventional two dimensional, 2D, outdoor farming, the objectof this invention is to teach means and methods to profitably harnessthe third dimension where unlimited space is available, where soil isavoided, and water can be conserved. The inventive 3D agricultureaccording to the present invention focuses on utilizing the thirddimension efficiency by teaching devices, systems and methods tocompress the vertical space needed for food production.

The teachings according to the present invention of 3D farming is thepartitioning of the third dimension into a plurality of layers(multi-layers) each of which is capable of being supplied withnutrients, and the light needed to sustain growth. Said plurality oflayers are supported by means of a 3D structure that comprises a mastersystem comprising subsystems which are designed to optimally providewater, light, nutrients, CO2, O2, and temperature controls for specificplant organism species.

Said plurality of layers comprise strings of interconnected soil-less(SanSSoil) growth elements, SGEs, each of which is integrally made tohave a multi-function capability including: germinating the seed,growing the plant, providing the plant with physical structural support,water, nutrient, light, and capability to sense the plant environment.

The strings of SGEs are disposed in the first, second and third spatialcoordinates. They are in the form of one dimensional network, twodimensional network or three dimensional network supported by themultilayer structure.

An aspect of the invention is resource utilization efficiency such thatstaple foods and bio-energy are produced profitably so that the food andenergy supplied with no “food or fuel” competition problem. This isaccomplished by means of inventive features described herein that enablethe plants in each SGE in string networks to share resources including:light, nutrients, and intra-layer space.

Another aspect of the present invention is making the each SGE and thestring interconnection and space between strings optically transparentso as to enable light to pass through plurality of layers to share,conserve and efficiently utilize light. This will minimize the need formany light sources, thereby reducing product cost.

Another aspect of the present invention is avoidance limitations ofprior art method of growing plants to reduce cost to enable economicalstaple food production.

Another aspect of the present invention is saving vertical, intra-layerspace by enabling the plant root and plant shoot sharing. This means theroots of plants one layer, can occupy (share) the space of the shoots(leaves) of the layer below.

Another aspect of the present invention is providing a totally sealedsystem for growing plants for food and energy comprising inventivesealing features and mechanisms to recycle water and nutrient resourcesto maximize utilization efficiency and reducing cost. For example, thenatural transpiration of water is recaptured and reused. The plantgrowth environment is maintained at a desired temperature and relativehumidity for optimum plant performance. The result is water saving byreutilizing between 100-1000 times water which would have been wasted inconventional outdoor agriculture.

Another aspect of the present invention is the benefits of sealed 3Dgrowing system that include the avoidance of the unpredictable weatherconditions which results in a reliable food production with losses dueto weather. The sealed growing 3D system can be made aseptic, pathogenfree, adding yet another path to profitability assurance.

Another aspect of the present invention is the isolation of the sealed3D growing system from the external environment thereby protecting saidenvironment. This is especially beneficial when growing geneticallytransformed plant species (GMO) for experimental and productionpurposes.

Yet another aspect of the present invention is the ability of one layerto water, and nutrients from the strings of SGE in said layer, tostrings of SGEs in the plurality of lower layers. This is a uniquefeeding mechanism that is distinct from well know prior art hydroponicand aeroponics mechanisms

Yet another aspect of the present invention is the utilization ofartificial lighting, preferably LED, instead of solar lighting. Morespecifically, LED lighting that is delivered to the plants as pulses ofshort duration, between 0.1 ms and 2.5 ms, and frequencies between 30 Hzand 300 Hz. Applicant discovered that the enzymatic kinetics of theplant physiology can be made 4-10 times more efficient by temporalcontrol the light.

Yet another aspect of the present invention is the control of thespatial placement of LED illumination sources within the 3D growingsystem in order to maintain uniform illumination received by the growingplants.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The following drawings are intended to describe the preferredembodiments and operating principles. They are not intended to berestrictive or limiting as to sizes, scales, shapes or presence orabsence of certain necessary components that are not shown for brevitybut are, nonetheless, well known to those skilled in the art.

FIGS. 1A-1C describe prior art farming methods: Outdoor soil basedfarming, Indoor CEA (greenhouse) farming and 3D vertical farming.

FIGS. 1D-1H illustrate the various environments which plants grow intoand specifically how nutrients are delivered to the plant roots.

FIG. 2A illustrates a SanSSoil indoor farming system comprising aprotected environment for sustaining plant growth, and a controlsubsystem that follows a program to control the growth.

FIG. 2B-2C shows more details of the system 1, that is comprised ofmultilayer each of which comprises a network of strings of SanSSoilGrowth Elements, SGEs. The graph shows the localization of each elementin the 3D space, first, second and third spatial coordinates, and howthey periodically repeat with periods pz, py, pz.

FIG. 2D-2E describe more details how each SGE is made, its structuresand function.

FIGS. 2F-2K describe how SGE are interconnected into strings, which inturn from layers of plurality of strings all networked to from a 3Dgrowing system 1.

FIGS. 3A-3H describe the integrally made single SGE and its commutationswith its neighbors sharing resources: light and nutrients to supportgrowth.

FIGS. 3I-3M describe the integrally SGE and SGE strings assuming growthplants in various orientations.

FIG. 3N illustrates the possibility that strings of SGE mayinterconnected into series and parallel network combinations incommunication with resource supply sources.

FIG. 3P show exemplary plurality of configurations to attach SGE tosupply sources, and to neighboring SGEs.

FIGS. 4A-4B illustrate delivery subsystems to multilayer SGE networkedstrings. These subsystems deliver light from the support walls of themain structure.

FIGS. 4C-4E show that main system housing protective structure designedto various sections.

FIGS. 5A-5B illustrate SGEs allowing plants to grow upside-down

DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

In my co-pending FSA, I described transformational new paradigm foragriculture can be realized to solve the problems facing humanity andachieve food and plant based energy security. One key feature of the newparadigm is the understanding the profitability conditions of farming.This has been accomplished by the formulation of AgricultureProfitability Assurance Law, AgriPAL, It is repeated here as EQ. (2)

$\begin{matrix}{{{\eta_{E}( \frac{ɛ_{sol}}{ɛ_{other}} )}\frac{\overset{\_}{ROE}}{\overset{\_}{COE}}} \geq {( {1 + p + f + v} ).}} & (2)\end{matrix}$

AgriPAL enables an enterprise to predict profitability of plant growingsystems, to prices, and to identify efficiency bottlenecks.

The economic viability index, EVI, is defined as:

${{EVI} \equiv {\eta_{E}( \frac{ɛ_{sol}}{ɛ_{other}} )}} = {\eta_{E}{g_{solar}.}}$

This links for the first time the economic parameters of farming,profit, p, fixed cost, f, variable cost, v, to the physiologicalparameters of organisms (plants, algae, other phototrophs), energyconversion efficiency, η_(E), including a gain factor,

${g_{solar} = ( \frac{ɛ_{sol}}{ɛ_{other}} )},$

wherein, ε_(sol), is the solar energy consumed per cycle and, ε_(other),all other energies consumed.

An enhanced EVI, was derived from a the new Plant Growth Model, PGM,also described in FSA, is given by: EVI^(e)≡n_(e) ^(E)≡g_(e)η_(E). Thisincreases the efficiency by yet another gain factor, g_(e), which can be10-100, achieved by means of controlling and optimizing physiologicalgrowth parameters as well maximizing the temporal and spatial resourceutilization efficiencies.

The present invention comprises aspects of AgriPAL that deals withmaximizing space utilization efficiencies, which include threedimensional, 3D, soil-less, SanSSoil, plant growing structures andsubsystems to sustain growth. More specifically, the aspects that reducethe cost of said structures and subsystems which lead to theminimization of the parameter f in Eq. (2). Even more specifically, theincrease of g_(e)η_(E) which is a function of the n, the number ofvertical layers in 3D farming systems wherein the yield is measured inunits of ton/hectare-meter, or ton/m3, or kg/m3.

The preferred embodiments, in the present application, deal with growingplants in 3D space that is limitless. More specifically, 3D spaceincluding, growing plants in 3D edifices, structures, or towers ofheights, ranging from 10 meter to 100 meters, and even more preferablytower heights beyond 100 meter perhaps approaching 500 meter or even1000 meter. Building having heights exceeding 500 m already exist. It isalso known that making wind turbine tower as high 150 m is economicalfeasible

FIG. 2A is an exemplary depiction of an indoor SanSSoil farming system100 comprising a SanSSoil sheltered and protected controlled environment101 and a control subsystem 102. The SanSSoil sheltered and protectedcontrolled environment 101 is designed to be substantially impermeableto pests, and undesired gases, liquids, particulates, and other foreignobjects. Preferably said protected environment is well insulated andprotected from outside temperature swings in order to maintain a desiredtemperature that is most suitable for growth and results in maximumproductivity.

In certain situations, solar radiation may augment artificial light forphotosynthetic growth. In this case the SanSSoil environment 101 may beequipped with filters to filter out unwanted solar wavelengths includingultra-violet, infra-red and certain visible wavelengths.

The hybrid growth method based on the combination of artificiallighting, preferably LED, with selected solar wavelengths will enablethe maximization of g_(e)g_(solar), viability index and the profitmargins established through meeting the AgriPAL condition as describedin FSA

The SanSSoil environment also comprises structures for handlingseed/seedling input 105 harvested product output. Said structures arepreferably designed to incorporate appropriate sealing structures suchas load locks in order to maintain sterile or near sterile conditions.Means to achieve impermeability and sterility of SanSSoil edifices arewell known to persons skilled in the art. Internally, the SanSSoilenvironment 101 houses a plurality of SanSSoil plant culture layers 103disposed in a three dimensional space. The SanSSoil plant layers aremade form structures and materials that are optically transparent. Thiswill enable the layers share and recycle unabsorbed light, therebyincreasing the light energy utilization efficiency.

The control subsystem 102 is programmed to control all aspects of growthphysiology to achieve economic viability by ensuring that

${EVI}^{e} = {{g_{e}\eta_{E}} = {( {G_{sp}G_{t}G_{f}} )( {\prod\limits_{i = 1}^{n}\; g_{i}} )\eta_{E}}}$

approaches 1 in order for AgriPAL condition to be satisfied. Each gainparameter in the portfolio has an optimum range that gives the maximumvalue. This is adjusted by the subsystem 102 for each species. The upperand lower limits of this range are determined experimentally inoptimized environmental parameters.

In some situations, a group comprising more than one interactingparameters, may be adjusted and optimized together. For example,adjusting the carbon dioxide to an optimum value limited by the darkreaction enzyme density requires adjusting the light level until it islimited by the light reaction enzyme density. The steps of optimizationare aided by appropriate sensors which communicate with the controllervalues to require adjustments.

Each layer 103 within the SanSSoil environment 101, is so designed tosustain the growth of plants or organisms in integrally made SanSSoilgrowth elements (modules), SGE 1, described further in FIGS. 2B-2K, andFIGS. 3A-3P. The layers 103 and the plurality of SGE's are spaced insuch a manner that optimizes the space utilization efficiency G_(sp).

Each SGE 1, comprises integrally made structure 1 a, 1 b which housesthe plant 2, the shoot 2 s, and the root 2 r, and connected to anutrient sources 3, 3 a. The nutrients drip or spray downward on theroot in the cup like substructure. One key aspect of the presentinvention is to combine this method of feeding, with foliar feeding,well known in the art, by means of fogging subsystem (or mist) whichpreferably supplies micron scale fluid particles (droplets) that areabsorbed directly by the plant leaves, by-passing root uptake. Each SGE1, optionally and integrally comprises a light source 4, and a sensor 5.

It is also possible to have two fogging systems, one for supplying oneset (a first set) of nutrients to the root and a second supplyingdifferent nutrient set to the leaves. In addition to providing more thatone feeding sources, it is contemplated that in certain situations, saidsource may be applied sequentially, or in a temporally pulsed mannerwith adjustable periods and duration.

This inventive feature is unique to indoor farming, according to thepresent invention, because it affords a new degree of freedom for thesubsystem 102 to control the components of gain factor g_(e), throughoptimization of the operating range of each component. This isespecially advantageous when two sets of nutrients are antagonistic toeach other, competing to prevent the optimum pH to establish for maximumbeneficial uptake.

FIG. 2B shows that in each of layers 103 a, 103 b, and 103 b, the SGE's(FIG. 2C) are connected in strings 106, that are connected to nutrientssources delivered to each SGE site. In the first spatial coordinate, x,the SGE repeat at period px, 107 a, while the strings repeat in thesecond coordinate, y, at a period py, 107 b. In the third spatialcoordinate, z, the layers repeat at period pz, 107 c. The dashed lines108 depict columns of SGEs in there respective layers. The total numberof plants in the 3D system, N_(3D)=(N_(x)p_(x))(N_(y)p_(y))(N_(z)p_(z)),determines the over all 3D productivity of the system 100.

The illumination sources 1 h, 1 j and auxiliary sensors, 1 g, or otherresource, are disposed in any orientation relative to the three spatialcoordinates, FIGS. 2C-2E.

As shown in FIG. 2F, a plurality of SGEs are connect as a linear string111 a, which is connected to a sources 3. The connection structures areso designed to deliver with high conductivity nutrients to each site 1.Preferably, these structure are designed for quick connection to theSGE, enabling rapid and inexpensive and automated means to form a longstring. These structures also have the strength to spurt the weight ofthe plants in the string. FIG. 2G show a cross section of the string.

In FIG. 2H, many strings 111 a, 11 b, are placed in parallel to form alayer 103. The cross section FIG. 2I illustrated an important feature ofthe present inventions which is the empty space between strings. Thisenables the sharing of nutrients, light that pass through between thestrings and between the layers.

The advantages of the string interconnections is further highlighted inFIGS. 2J-2K wherein two layers 103 a, 103 b disposed vertically, eachcomprising a plurality of strings. One immediately notices the spacesaving in the cross section FIG. 2 k where the plants of layer 103 b, isin the space of the top layer 103 a. The space between two layers is pz.It will be show later in a different embodiment that the period pz canbe made to vary depending on the age of the plant manually orautomatically.

Now we provide in FIGS. 3A-3P more specific details of the constructionof the SanSSoil Growth Element, SGE. The term integral multifunction isdefined as a structure that comprises at least two substructuresintegrally made substantially permanently attached so as to carry out atleast two functions. The our preferred embodiment said functions arechosen from the group: {mechanical support, growth sustenance,germination, self-supplying nutrients, self-supplying light, sensingenvironment, communication nutrients to nearest neighbor}.

The SGE in FIG. 3A comprises growth compartment or substructure 1 awhich mechanically and physiologically supports the growth of the root 2r and the shoot 2 s to maturity. The substructure 1 a is integrallyattached to a connecting conduit 1 b, that is in fluid communicationwith growth substructure 1 a, through orifice or opening 1 e. Fluid 1 d,flows through said orifice 1 c, supplying a stream 1 f to the root.Conduit 1 b may have any cross section as shown in FIG. 3B.

Conduit 1 b is removably attached to at least one source 3. Saidattachment is preferably quick connect disconnect type with sealingfunction to prevent leakage, 1 e. The source 3 provides essentialresources, ingredients, to optimally sustain plant growth. Saidresources comprise at lease water and nutrients, but may also conductand deliver light by means of total internal reflection mechanisms, wellknown in the fiber optic art and the back-light sources well know in theliquid crystal display art. The conduit may conduct electrical signalsor power from sensors and to local LEDs ingrated directly into theconduit 1 b.

Conduit 1 b according to FIGS. 3C-3D, serves to connect two SGEs to formstrings as described above, FIGS. 2K-2K, and to pass resources 3 a fromone SGE to another. Said resources include fluids, conducting signalsfrom sensors 5, 5 a, and energizing LEDs 4, to provide illumination 4 bto local plants.

As shown in FIGS. 3E-3H, the SGE in the preferred embodiment alsocomprises a seed support structure 1 m, which functions to mechanicallysupport the seed 2, and to provide the optimal environment for highgermination rate. By following the arrows in the figures, we show theemergence of the shoot 2 a and root 2 b to growth of the seedling andfinally the mature plant. This emphasizes the significance of theintegral construction of the SGE according to this preferred embodimenthighlighting the capability multi-functions which comprise: mechanicalsupport of seed and mature plant, germination, local nutrient delivery,local delivery of light, environment sensing, and growing plant tomaturity, FIG. 3D.

The multi-function integral construction of SGE, also highlight thelocal self-sufficiency of each SGE, that plays a significant role inmaximizing 3D space utilization efficiency. It also serves to make itsdistinction clear, relative from prior art plant growing practicesdescribed above in connection with FIGS. 1A-1H.

Since the plants follow the light direction, we can advantageouslyexploit this property to orient the plant growth in any desireddirection as illustrated in FIG. 3I, wherein the growth axis 6, makes anangle 6 a with respect to the layer axis 1 j. In other embodiments, thewhole string and plane, 10, may be oriented at an angle 6 b with respectto the horizontal direction iv, FIG. 3J.

Yet in other embodiments, it is preferred to make strings that arehanging from top to bottom, 11, 12, with SGE oriented in desireddirections determined by the light as shown in FIGS. 3K-3M.

In addition, there are system optimization benefits to interconnect SGEstring in the form of a network, 13, FIG. 3N, that combines series andparallel combinations of strings attached to feeding structures, 14, 15,which receive resources 16, 17 from a master delivery system (no shown).The benefits of this arrangement include: increasing speed andflexibility of system assembly, reducing infrastructure cost, andoptimizing consumable utilization efficiencies.

Integrally made multi-function self-sufficient SGE may be attached tofeed structure, or string interconnection sutures, 3, in a plurality ofdesired configurations, 20 a-20 e, shown in FIG. 3P, depending on theplant species and system design requirements. Persons skilled in the artmay produce other configurations, without departing from the SGE networkinterconnectivity claimed by the present invention.

In conventional outdoor farming, the shoots, stems, and branches areconstrained to grow upward in the direction of sun light, and the rootsare constrained to grow downward in the soil where the water andnutrients reside, one embodiment of the present invention enables theSGE's to the plants upside down, as shown in FIG. 5A-5B. This is abenefit of the present invention that abandons the soil and can grow inartificial light that may emanate from any direction including from thebottom upward.

Layers 200 a and 200 b comprise strings SGE 1, the bottom of each sharethe same space 201. Conveniently, the space 201 shared by the rootsbecomes the conduit to supply the nutrients 202 in the direction of thearrow. While the string interconnections energy the LEDs to supply theillumination 203 a, 203 b.

The system 100 illustrated in FIG. 2A and discussed above, revealing itsvarious components and subsystems, 100 a, is the embodiment of acomplete self sufficient 3D SanSSoil growing system for food, biofuel,and a plurality of plant made materials for industrial and medicalapplications.

The integral SGE interconnected networked of 3D strings are suppliedwith (fed) required resources (nutrients and light) to sustain optimumgrowth by a plurality of methods including: direct connection of eachstring to sources, fogging, spraying and a combination thereof. FIGS.4A-4E illustrate non liming examples of systems enclosures geometricalconfiguration, 100, 100 b in relation to the feed subsystems, 112, 113,114, 115, 116 delivering streams 117 fluid and light from all sides andoptionally from the top and bottom.

FIGS. 4C-4E shows stackable self sufficient configurations of completesystem that comprise automated means to input (load) seeds and seedlingsand harvesting the final product in a totally aspect manner sees orseedling trays. Said means may further comprise load-locks chambers asthe interface between system 100 and the outside world, thereby ensuringaseptic loading and unloading.

The self-sufficiency and modularity of the contemplated system willenable easy scale up to larger production volumes, once a module isoptimized in terms of yield, productivity per unit volume, resourceutilization efficiency and low production cost. A scaled up productionsystem comprising plurality of modules that may be stacked vertically toany desired height, the “sky is the limit”, the ultimate potential of 3Dagriculture, realizing the goal of food and energy security with noresource competition.

1. High Density Multi-Layer Farming System comprising: At least oneintegrally made SanSSoil growing element, SGE.
 2. The system in claim 1,wherein the SGE comprises a means to provide multifunctionself-sufficiency to sustain life of said biomass.
 3. The systemaccording to claim 1, wherein said at least one SGE is interconnected toform multi-layer three dimensional array structure disposed in a first,second and third spatial coordinates.
 4. The system according to claim1, herein said at least one SGE comprises: At least one biomasscontainment structure, At least one biomass feeding structure integrallyconnected to said containment structure, and, One joining substructurein communication with at least one source to sustain biomass life. 5.The system according to claim 1, wherein the integrally made SGE isdisposed in the direction of a first spatial coordinate and the bio-massgrowth axis is in a direction forming an angle relative to said firstspatial direction.
 6. The system according to claim 1, wherein thebio-mass comprises the root, stem and shoot systems growing in adirection a long a growth axis that makes an angle from 0 to 90 degreeswith respect to said first spatial coordinate direction.
 7. The systemaccording to claim 2, wherein the multi-functions comprise: at leastmechanical support, nutrient delivery and biomass growth.
 8. The systemaccording to claim 2, wherein the multi-functions further comprise atleast one function selected from the group consisting of seedgermination, illumination, oxygen and carbon dioxide conduction,humidity control, temperature controls and sensing function.
 9. Thesystem according to claim 3, wherein the array structure comprises: atleast one string disposed in a first spatial coordinate directioncomprising: a plurality of interconnected SGE separated by a first setof plurality of spaces along the first spatial coordinate, at least onesource for providing multi-functions to support biomass growth to saidSGE.
 10. The system according to claim 9, wherein the first set ofplurality of spaces comprises identical spaces of a first spatial periodalong a first spatial coordinate direction.
 11. The system according toclaim 9, wherein said at least one string comprises a plurality ofstrings disposed in a first plane along a first and second spatialcoordinate directions, and wherein plurality of strings are separated bya second set of plurality of spaces.
 12. The system according to claim11, wherein the second set of plurality of spaces comprises identicalspaces of a second spatial period along a second spatial coordinatedirection.
 13. The system according to claim 11, wherein said pluralityof strings disposed in said first plane, further comprises a sources ofmulti-function to support growth and a structure to mechanically supportsaid plurality of strings.
 14. The system according to claim 3, whereinthe array structure comprises: a plurality of strings of interconnectedintegrally made SGE disposed in a plurality of substantially parallelplurality of planes, wherein, the planes are along the first and secondspatial coordinates, and separated by a third set of plurality ofspaces, along a third coordinate direction.
 15. The system according toclaim 14, wherein the third set of plurality of spaces comprisesidentical spaces of a third spatial period along a third spatialcoordinate direction.
 16. The system according to claim 3, wherein thearray structure comprises, a plurality of self-sufficient interconnectedSGE, forming a three dimensional multi-layer periodic structurecomprising, first, second and thirds spatial periods.
 17. The systemaccording to claim 16, wherein each of first, second, and third spatialperiods may be varied during the growth time trajectory of the bio-mass.18. The system according to claim 16, wherein the array structurefurther comprises: means for mechanical support structure, and at leastone source for providing for multi-functions, and, a housing structurefor containing the system.
 19. The system according to claim 16, whereinarray comprises a plurality of strings of integrally made SGEintercommoned in a network of an appropriate series and parallelconnecting arrangements.
 20. The system according to claim 14, whereinsaid plurality of planes comprises, strings along a first spatialcoordinate which is the vertical direction.
 21. The system according to2, wherein, the biomass is phototrophic organism.
 22. The systemaccording to 2, wherein, the biomass is phototrophic microorganism. 23.The system according to 2 wherein, the biomass is at least aphototrophic plant.
 24. The system according to 2, wherein, the biomassis phototrophic bacterium.
 25. The system according to 2, wherein, thebiomass is algae.
 26. The system according to 2 wherein, the biomass isa living organism.
 27. The system according to 2 wherein,self-sufficiency comprises: essential nutrients.
 28. The systemaccording to 27 wherein, essential nutrients comprise: primarynutrients, secondary nutrients, and trance elements.
 29. The system inclaim 4 wherein, the containment structure further comprises:perforations to allow roots and fluid to pass there through.
 30. Thesystem in claim 4 wherein, the containment structure further comprises:at least one substructure for supporting biomass and growing media. 31.The system in claim 30 wherein the growing media comprises: soillessgel.
 32. The system in claim 30 wherein the growing media comprises:soilless mesh structure.
 33. The system in claim 30 wherein the growingmedia comprises: soilless fiber structure.
 34. The system in claim 4wherein the feeding structure further comprises: a nutrient deliverysubstructure integrally connected to containment structure.
 35. Thesystem in claim 34 wherein said nutrient delivery substructurecomprises: spraying function.
 36. The system in claim 34 wherein saidnutrient delivery substructure comprises: misting function.
 37. Thesystem in claim 34 wherein said nutrient delivery substructurecomprises: dripping function.
 38. The system in claim 34 wherein saidnutrient delivery substructure comprises: fogging function.
 39. Thesystem in claim 4, wherein, the feeding structure is a closed tubularstructure.
 40. The system in claim 4, wherein the feeding structure isan open structure.
 41. The system in claim 4, wherein, the at least onejoining substructure comprises: a quick connect/disconnect feature forcommunication with at least one source to sustain biomass life.